Call for Authors
Feminist Judgments: Rewritten Health Law Opinions
The U.S. Feminist Judgments Project seeks contributors of rewritten judicial opinions and commentary on those opinions for an edited collection entitled Feminist Judgments: Rewritten Health Law Opinions. This edited volume, proposed to be published by Cambridge University Press, is part of a collaborative project among law professors and others to rewrite, from a feminist perspective, key judicial decisions. The initial volume, Feminist Judgments: Rewritten Opinions of the United States Supreme Court, edited by Kathryn M. Stanchi, Linda L. Berger, and Bridget J. Crawford, was published in 2016 by Cambridge University Press. Subsequent volumes in the series focus on different courts or different subjects. This call is for contributions to a volume of health law decisions rewritten from a feminist perspective.
Health Law volume editors Seema Mohapatra and Lindsay Wiley seek prospective authors for fifteen rewritten health law opinions covering a range of topics. With the help of an Advisory Committee, the editors have chosen a list of cases to be rewritten (as noted below). Potential authors are welcome to suggest other cases, but given certain constraints (including a preference for avoiding cases that have already or soon will be rewritten for other volumes in this series), it is unlikely that the list of cases will change. Cases may come from any jurisdiction and any court in the U.S.. The definition of feminism on which the series is premised is quite broad and certainly includes intersectional analysis of cases where sex or gender played a role alongside racism, ableism, classism, and other concerns.
As the core of the Feminist Judgments Project is judicial opinions, proposals must be either to (1) rewrite a case (not administrative guidance, regulations, etc.) or (2) comment on a rewritten case. Rewritten opinions may be re-imagined majority opinions, dissents, or concurrences, as appropriate to the court. Feminist judgment writers will be bound by law and precedent in effect at the time of the original decision (with a 10,000-word maximum for the rewritten judgment). Commentators will explain the original court decision, how the feminist judgment differs from the original judgment, and what difference the feminist judgment might have made (4,000-word maximum for the commentary).
To facilitate collaboration between commentators and opinion writers across the entire volume, the editors will host a workshop on December 7, 2018 at the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law. All commentators and opinion writers are invited, but not required, to participate in the workshop. The Hall Center for Law and Health at the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law will host a welcome dinner the night prior to the workshop and provide the meals at the workshop. Authors must cover their own travel expenses. Selection of authors does not depend on their ability or willingness to attend the December workshop. The editors are also tentatively planning to host a conference celebrating publication of the volume at American University Washington College of Law in Washington, DC in fall 2020.
The U.S. Feminist Judgments Project approaches revised judicial opinion writing as a form of critical socio-legal scholarship. There are several world-wide projects engaged in similar efforts, including the U.K.-based Feminist Judgments: From Theory to Practice (2010); Australian Feminist Judgments: Righting and Rewriting Law (2014); Northern/Irish Feminist Judgments: Judges’ Troubles and the Gendered Politics of Identity (2017); Feminist Judgments of Aotearoa New Zealand: Te Rino - A Two-Stranded Rope (2017); the Women’s Court of Canada; and a pan-European project; and other U.S.-based projects on Tax Law (2017), Trusts and Estates, Torts, Family Law, Employment Discrimination, and Reproductive Justice that are in print or in progress.
Those who are interested in rewriting an opinion or providing the commentary on one of the rewritten Health Law cases should complete the submission form found here. Commentators and opinion writers who wish to work together are welcome to indicate that in the application.
Applications are due by September 22, 2018 at 5:00 p.m. (EST). The editors expect to notify applicants no later than October 15, 2018. Abstracts of rewritten opinions will be due on November 16, 2018 for circulation to fellow authors. Abstracts of commentaries will be due on November 30, 2018 for circulation to fellow authors. First drafts of rewritten opinions will be due on April 1, 2019 for circulation to commentary authors. First drafts of commentaries will be due on June 1, 2019.
Tentative List of Cases: (in chronological order)